High Court · 2025

circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order, writ or direction more particu larly-,in the nature to Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of 2nd respondent in not considering the representation dated 04-03-2025 for completing the drainage pipe line work to prevent water logging from Sy. No.73 to 128 and Sy. No.129 is as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional consequently direct the respondent No.2 to consider the representation dated 4-03-2025 for completing the drainage pipe line work to prevent water logging from Sy. No.73 to 128 and Sy. No.129. i:1j,{ ,( w lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 2nd Respondent to take action for laying of dr3inage pipe line work to prevent water logging from Sy. No.73 to 128 and Sy. No.129 pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI RAMAKRISHNA K. Counsel for the Respondent No.1: cP FOR MUNtCtPAL ADMINISTRAT|ON AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel foi the Respondent No.2: SRI PUTTA KRISHNA REDDy, S.C. FOR MUNICIPALITIES The Court made the following: ORDER . f HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE B. VIIAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITON No.1.1351 OF 2025 ORDER: (ORAL) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to declare the actlon of respondent No.2 Municipality in not considering his representation dated 04.03.2025 for completing the drainage pipeline work to prevent water logging from Survey Nos.73 to the Survey Nos. 128 and 129, as being illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional

2. Heard Mr. K, Ramakrishna, leamed counsel for the petitioner; Mr. Putta Krishna Reddy, leamed Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 Municipality, and perused the material on record.

3. Leamed counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner along with his brothers are the owners of the land admeasuring Acs.16-17 guntas ln Survey No.l28, Zaheerabad Town, Medak District, having purchased the same under registered sale deeds bearing document Nos.1261 of 1993 and 216211993 dated 30.08.1993 and document No.2785 of 1988 dated 06.08.1988. The petitioners submitted application for conversion of the land into residential plots and by order of the Revenue Divisional Offrcer (RDO), Medak District , 2 dated 26.10.1994 vide proceedings No.Ell13177, El113178 and E1ll3l79, permission was granted. Subsequently, Layout permit No.81/1997 tiom DTCP, was granted to the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner and his brothers have converted the land into plots and sold the same to prospective purchasers. However, due to lack of infrastructure and drainage pipeline, the drain water is being left open from Survey No.73 towards Survey Nos.l28 and 129. The petitioner and his brothers came to know that there is proposal by respondent No.2 Municipality for laying of drainage pipeline to prevent water logging into the house plots of the layout in Survcy No. l2g. The petitioner and his brothers had been requesting respondent No.2 to complete the pipeline, however, the matter is being doctged. It is submitted that due to the ensuing monsoon season, there will be huge flooding of drain water which would make the lives of the plot purchasers miserable. Leamed counsel submitted that the petitioner submitted representation dated 04.03.2 025 to respondent No.2 for completion of the proposal of laying of drainage pipeline to prevent water logging into the house plots of the layout in Survey No.l2, but so far, no action has been taken. 3 4 Leamed Standing Counsel for respondent No.2, as per his oral instructions, submitted that there is no proposal by respondent No.2 for laying of pipeline. Even according to the petitioner, himself and his brothers are the developers of the approved layout in Survey No'128. Thus, the drainage pipeline, if any, has to be at the cost of the petitioner. If the petitioner comes up with a proposal requesting respondent No.2 to lay drainage pipeline by paying requisite charges, appropriate action will be taken in accordance with law.

5. Leamed counsel for the petitioner submitted that if any costs are to be incurred by the petitioner for laying of the drainage of the pipeline, the same will be duly paid by the petitioner.

6. In the circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No.2 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated

04.03.2025 for laying/completing the drainage pipeline work to prevent water logging from Survey Nos.73 to the Survey Nos.128 and 129, Zaheerabad Town, Medak District by collecting requisite charges/fees, as may be required, from the petitioners, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order' There shall be no order as to costs. l I 4 As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this writ petition, stand closed. //TRUE COPY// ^/ SD/. K.SREERAMA MURTHY PUTY REGTSTR4B .,SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administrative Department, State of Tela69ana, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2. The 'Commissioner, Zaheerabad lvlunicipality, Zaheerabad, Sanga Reddy District {1

3. One CC to SRI RAMAKRISHNA K., Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to GP for lVlunicipal Administration and Urban Development, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

5. One CC to SRI PUTTA KRISHNA REDDY, S.C. for ltlunicipalities [OPUC] 6. Two CD Copies MP GJP g ;. ) HIGH COURT DATED:1610412025 1Y\ r, $ T.d c 2 E APR 2025 c e t .f5.s,,":"rr ORDER WP.No.11361 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 0 I at $-,- {tr\'r